The Escapist refers to this forum!

[GBGames]

It was pretty wild to read about "our world" on The Escapist: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/8/14

[lakibuk]

So who is the forum member who made more $ than Carmack?

[Sirrus]

Pretty good article - mostly true too. The mindset was right on concerning most people who chose to stay in the AAA segment of the industry.

[Allen Varney]

I wrote that article. I hope the folks here liked it.

[DavidRM]

I can see I'm going to have to promote my book more.

-David

[PoV]

Hehe.

Nice read. In the same issue, Costik has a fine article about the impending doom of the games industry. I always love to read about that.

[Christian]

Hey, i didnt know of the existance of that site, but its great, i readed this article http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/3/9 and i think its awesome, later im going to read yours, im sure its just as good as the other one.

[Andy]

Nice article and great devotion to indie scene Allen.

Full of mistakes, wrong stamps and former heros and their statements though.

Saying seriously. Can anybody from here - even my lovely Thomas Warfield - state that his (her) particular game existing today would sell well in the next ten years? Pavlina's times have gone away guys - together with him. The competition in the area (even with a bunch of terrible titles) on the highest possible level. The wheel was invented a couple year ago and inventors got their dividends. Right now go figure how to crash all that portals around to free the area again.

Is anybody ready to share with their opinions on issue.

PS One more time - please don't take this personal Allen. OK? You made great job. Thanks a lot to you.

[luggage]

Can anybody from here - even my lovely Thomas Warfield - state that his (her) particular game existing today would sell well in the next ten years?

Seeing as we don't know what's going to happen saying whether they will sell well in 10 years or they won't seel well in 10 years are both equally correct (or wrong). Have to wait and see.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by luggage

Seeing as we don't know what's going to happen saying whether they will sell well in 10 years or they won't seel well in 10 years are both equally correct (or wrong). Have to wait and see.

Well. Unbeatable point? This is not fair!!!

OK. How about - if you can't predict and calculate - you can't do marketing at all?

[Black Hydra]

Andy - While I know nothing first hand I'd just like to comment that people are all to quick to dismiss people like Steve and Dobson. Yes, they've hit their peak, but as Pavlina said before in "adopting a 5 to 10 year strategy" the decline isn't instantaneous either. I believe Pavlina commented that 2004 was his best year yet for sales. Just goes to show that once you build up that momentum your business can still survive even if it isn't buzz on everyone's lips.

I believe I heard James say he sold around 100 copies of Swarm a month. Swarm has been around for years and it is still selling far more than most people here sell in a year.

And don't be so quick to dismiss the thoughts Steve points out in his articles. While many of the details on how to become successful may shift over time, most of his ideas on how he built his business could apply to most online businesses today, not just the gaming sector 10 years ago.

I constantly hear people quote Steve saying "make 1000 to 10000 dollars a month". They quote that but that wasn't the important information in his articles. It was the end results, the determination and all those things that are basically common business info not "get rich quick" tidbits of information that fade fast.

I'm not saying I know anything at all (read the sig) but I do know it is not wise to simply disregard a bunch of information from someone who was successful (and if 2004 is any indication of his sales) still is.

[tentons]

Originally Posted by Andy

Can anybody from here - even my lovely Thomas Warfield - state that his (her) particular game existing today would sell well in the next ten years? Pavlina's times have gone away guys - together with him.

I'm not anyone to know, but it seems that if you improve the production values of those same games to today's "standards," they would indeed sell in today's market. And, in fact, it seems that because they do sell in today's market there's some proof. Why wouldn't they? It's not as though people's tastes have changed. Casual game design isn't so different from these forebears.

Edit: I do concede that it's tougher to reach people these days, and I'm tired so maybe I missed the point being made. Sorry, I'll be quiet and listen now.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Black Hydra

And don't be so quick to dismiss the thoughts Steve points out in his articles. While many of the details on how to become successful may shift over time, most of his ideas on how he built his business could apply to most online businesses today, not just the gaming sector 10 years ago.

Black H - let we agree - I haven't ever attacked Steve with his articles. I was reading them as well. And appreciated his support. OK?

And now please look at this... Dexterity.com shows 116000 rating in Alexa (number of visitors multiplied somehow with number of pages visited) - our website shows something near 100000. Comparable. And I know what numbers we sell.
Well. Let we say his games are increadibly better, he got another sources to sell them etc. etc. But after that all I know our numbers and know that we get the comparable number of visitors and I could make the trustful estimations.

I say only - times have changed. And this is not fair to say that newcoming guys are bad in marketing for example. They just get no the same options anymore. Or at least old options don't work anymore. REM: Check Download.com and try to find our games in the list. REM REM: Try to get your game highlighted in PCGamer (James - am I recall correctly?)

PS You are in trouble new guys! Publish your games as fast as possible before this train hasn't run away at all. Kidding.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by tentons

I'm not anyone to know, but it seems that if you improve the production values of those same games to today's "standards," they would indeed sell in today's market. And, in fact, it seems that because they do sell in today's market there's some proof. Why wouldn't they? It's not as though people's tastes have changed. Casual game design isn't so different from these forebears.

What is the difference in retail and shareware from player's point of view? What is the average life circle of retail titles?

I'm afraid the living in tiny niche comes to be over. This area quickly becomes powered by standard entertainment and business laws. No?

[Jack Norton]

I believe you're correct Andy. Make 1000$ to 10000$ from a game? quite difficult (I'd say make 100$ to 1000$ a month).

Talking only about direct sales, since I've limited experience with portals

For sure - you have to increase the quality of the titles by a lot = longer development time = less income per month spend working.

[Andy]

Please welcome guys and gals - Jack Norton.
See? A little bit lower website rating (so far). But full of fun and very special games - in another than our genres - with Mac versions as well (say thanks to PTK again Jack!) - and amounts of all possible his efforts (i know for sure). And... the same opinion.

[Black Hydra]

Andy, I'm sure your right, and I am careful to listen to every word people like yourself and others who have managed to get some success say.

I just see a lot of bashing of people like Steve using that "1000 to 10000 dollars" quote and it seems like they weren't really listening to him at all just whining when they don't seem to have the same immediate results. (I am not talking about you here, Andy, but some others who haven't enjoyed the same success as yourself)

While I take notice of any advice someone with some experience says, I tend to shy away from overly negative advice. A lot of people talk about how things aren't like the 'good old days' but simply make a long and educated point about how the noobs here are screwed. It's nice to balance out the overly optimistic approach to set yourself in reality, but not if it is try to dissuade people from following their dreams and selling their lives to a less risky corporate drudgery...

That's my 2 cents.

[Andy]

Basically I'm just trying to clean up from upcoming competitors Hydra.

[terin]

Andy, you are crushing the dreams and aspirations of the programmers who will give other programmers the ideas they need to strike it rich!

It all comes down to marketing in my opinion, everything always does. The media tolerance for indie games is not nearly as wide as the quantity produced.

It is at this time I mention that people who work with me tend to end up in magazines and major media sources far more often than others

Shameless self plug On to what I REALLY think.

This was a fun read. It isn't 100% accurate, it isn't 100% up to speed. The general gist of things is there but it tends to ignore the many pitfalls and failures. It showed up what we wanted to see, an undiscovered goldmine in indie games. Can't blame em either.

What Andy so unpoetically pointed out was that this goldmine has been discovered and it is chalk full of claim jumpers. If you want to make a fortune (or even a living) you have to be smart, cunning, crafty, and creative... or hire someone who is.

I don't think the train is leaving, I think the train is on a circular track. Shareware comes and goes like the tide. Here are some facts, as I see 'em that have changed from the days the sources were used.

Shareware is becoming more popular by volume of sales

Shareware is getting more coverage these days by media outlets than it has recently (since the early days)

Shareware has become more competitive both in the required quality levels and the sheer number of competitors

Portal Games have severely shorter life-spans than the article suggests.

Non-Portal games take longer to get going due to the increased competition.

In the end the industry has become more profitable but less profitable per-person.

Finally: According to economics this will stablize around where it is now. The competitive levels will balance the S curve. As the market expands the competition expands with it, as it retracts the competition will retract. The ONLY question at this point is this:

Is there enough market share for a smart person to carve out a segment capable of sustaining them over a period of 3-5 years. The answer: Probably.

If not the market will decline and go into recession.

-Joe

[soniCron]

What I see is a lot of unrealistic dreaming; wishing for days of yesteryear when the grass was greener and the women were buxom. Seriously, when you've got thousands of new people signing up to the Internet every day and not a proportional amount of businesses doing the same, there's going to be an unnatural skew. That had to change at some point. Even so, how many more folks are trying to make indie games these days? How many folks are on the Internet buying these games these days? Have they gone up that unproportionally, or is the compliant that you can't get by selling programmer graphics and subpar gameplay on the no-longer-nerd-infested Internet anymore?

EDIT: Wow. That came across as incredibly ignorant.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by soniCron

Have they gone up that unproportionally, or is the compliant that you can't get by selling programmer graphics and subpar gameplay on the no-longer-nerd-infested Internet anymore?

Make that game and publish it Daniel.

No, seriously. Don't be offended. OK? But try to get visible and recognized after that. Even with non programmer graphics with just all that croud of terrible titles around. Just try this and say me later.

EDIT: I've postponed the reading of that one of your always long speaches Joe. Hmmm. What to say?... Correct. Correct.

The latest "probably" - i'd replace by something more appropriate like "may be"

[Black Hydra]

I think that Andy is definitely right (but I like to argue with people anyways). The article really made the shareware scene see like some financial orgy where you could come in and just reap in huge amounts of money. And that this was some hidden secret unknown to everyone in the world.

The fact is, (and is always being pointed out by those who experience it) that shareware is a very hard business to survive in and although it has advantages if you are an indie developer you have a lot of obstacles to overcome.

Dan - You really need to get those final touches on your games and get them up on your website. It seems like there are three types of people here. (1) successful indies, (2) indies, (3) time-wasting noobs. Until you graduate to the second catagory nobody really listens to you about anything (nobody listens to me either ), usually with good reason. Get into catagory 1 and I'm sure you could probably tell most the people here that promoting white supremacy on your website is a good sales tactic and they'd listen to you.

[merovingian]

From my perspective, most of the people on here will never amount to much financially, but they'll have a lot of fun either making a game or thinking about making one.

That having been said, there's *always* room for new blood no matter what the naysayers say. Anyone who insists otherwise is just making excuses. If you've got it, flaunt it.

Or to quote a dead president:

"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence.
Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.
Education will not; the world is full of educated failure.
Keep Believing. Keep Trying. Persistence and Determination alone are omnipotent." - Calvin Coolidge

[goodsol]

Hmmm... looks like some writer has been reading my blog

Originally Posted by Andy

Can anybody from here - even my lovely Thomas Warfield - state that his (her) particular game existing today would sell well in the next ten years?

I would be totally shocked if Pretty Good Solitaire sold less in its 2nd 10 years as it did in its first. Given that it currently sells more in one month than it did in its first 3 years combined (almost 4 years in fact), its 2nd ten years (which started in July) already has a nice lead.

The fact is, (and is always being pointed out by those who experience it) that shareware is a very hard business to survive in and although it has advantages if you are an indie developer you have a lot of obstacles to overcome.

Every business is a hard business, why should shareware be any different? The point of the article, I think, is that shareware allows you to live a better lifestyle than those poor sobs who work for the big gaming companies.

Currently the casual game space is experiencing what can only be a bubble where everybody is entering the area in the belief that they will make tons of easy money.

Of course it won't happen that way because the bubble will pop. The supply of product will overwhelm the demand (can you say "Game of the Day"?) When the bubble pops, a lot of companies will go out of business and people will exclaim that no one can possibly make money in casual games anymore.

This will be wonderful for the companies that survive because then there will be less competition again. I have no idea how long it will take the bubble to pop as bubbles can last longer and go higher than anyone would expect, but someday soon the market will change again.

The beauty of the direct to the customer method of shareware is that these external factors really don't mean much to a shareware business. As long as you are up and running and your web site can be found, people will find you. Of course, the key is to have something that people are looking for. People rarely find what they aren't looking for.

[Allen Varney]

The article really made the shareware scene see like some financial orgy where you could come in and just reap in huge amounts of money. And that this was some hidden secret unknown to everyone in the world. The fact is, (and is always being pointed out by those who experience it) that shareware is a very hard business to survive in and although it has advantages if you are an indie developer you have a lot of obstacles to overcome.

I could have played up the statement I made on the article's last page: "Yes, it's definitely possible to get rich in casual games. In fact, though, most newcomers fail dismally. The many reasons include lack of patience, lack of originality (the world doesn't need another Breakout clone), and lack of marketing." However, I was primarily interested in changing the hardcore audience's perceptions of casual gaming.

"This was some hidden secret unknown to everyone in the world" seems to me accurate. It really is a hidden secret, at least to hardcore gamers. I'm pretty sure that article will dumbfound the Escapist's target audience. Slashdot linked to it, and in the comments to the post, the geek community showed no awareness of the tenets of indie gaming.

[Jack Norton]

Originally Posted by goodsol

I would be totally shocked if Pretty Good Solitaire sold less in its 2nd 10 years as it did in its first. Given that it currently sells more in one month than it did in its first 3 years combined (almost 4 years in fact), its 2nd ten years (which started in July) already has a nice lead.

Yes but , pardon me, you situation is VERY particular. You were so smart to start early with a genre (solitaries) who will NEVER decline.
Not saying that it was your only merit: but surely is influencing your business more than everything else.
I didn't even dare to make a solitaire game. Why? I would have to compete with YOU

[monco]

Originally Posted by merovingian

From my perspective, most of the people on here will never amount to much financially, but they'll have a lot of fun either making a game or thinking about making one.

That having been said, there's *always* room for new blood no matter what the naysayers say. Anyone who insists otherwise is just making excuses. If you've got it, flaunt it.

Or to quote a dead president:

"Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence.
Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.
Education will not; the world is full of educated failure.
Keep Believing. Keep Trying. Persistence and Determination alone are omnipotent." - Calvin Coolidge

Talent and persistance are both necessary. The persistent lack-talent will continue to produce bad games which nobody buys, and sadly continue to blame "market forces" for their failure.

[terin]

Heh Allen, I understood that was your goal and I certainly appreciated it

-Joe

[ERoberts]

Originally Posted by Jack Norton

Yes but , pardon me, you situation is VERY particular. You were so smart to start early with a genre (solitaries) who will NEVER decline.
Not saying that it was your only merit: but surely is influencing your business more than everything else.
I didn't even dare to make a solitaire game. Why? I would have to compete with YOU

Hey, Jack, you started with sports simulation/management quite some time ago now (is it 2 or 3 years?). But you kept making new products, didn't you? You didn't have the patience to keep adding to and improving USM, releasing richer and richer versions over the years, did you?

What could you have achieved in these years had you had the same focus, dedication and drive as Warfield or Pavlina? If you had kept your head down and focused on making your product so good that it is irresistable for fans of the genre?

I'm sick and tired of people claiming that the situation of the successful indies are so special and only a result of them being lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, when it's clearly a matter of hard work, dedication and talent.

I'm sorry Jack, but you've never come across to me as someone who's building a serious business, so I'm not surprised that you don't think it is possible to reach the same success as Pavlina or Warfield. But I think it is fair to say that this is because of YOU and YOUR decisions, rather than the state of the industry.

[Jack Norton]

I bow in front of you all. My excuses